←back to thread

Gemini 2.5 Flash Image

(developers.googleblog.com)
1092 points meetpateltech | 1 comments | 26 Aug 25 14:01 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
notsylver ◴[26 Aug 25 15:15 UTC] No.45027765[source]▶
I digitised our family photos but a lot of them were damaged (shifted colours, spills, fingerprints on film, spots) that are difficult to correct for so many images. I've been waiting for image gen to catch up enough to be able to repair them all in bulk without changing details, especially faces. This looks very good at restoring images without altering details or adding them where they are missing, so it might finally be time.
replies(6): >>45028087 #>>45028089 #>>45028096 #>>45028100 #>>45028616 #>>45029813 #
Almondsetat ◴[26 Aug 25 15:41 UTC] No.45028089[source]▶
All of the defects you have listed can be automatically fixed by using a film scanner with ICE and a software that automatically performs the scan and the restoration like Vuescan. Feeding hundreds (thousands?) of photos to an experimental proprietary cloud AI that will give you back subpar compressed pictures with who knows how many strange artifacts seems unnecessary
replies(2): >>45028394 #>>45031799 #
1. wingworks ◴[26 Aug 25 20:17 UTC] No.45031799[source]▶
Vuescan is terrible. SilverFast has better defaults. But nothing beats the orig Nikon scan software when using ICE. It does a great job of removing dust, fingerprints etc Even when you zoom in. VS what iSRD does in SilverFast, which if you zoom in and compare the 2. iSRD kinda smooches/blurs the infrared defects whereas Nikon Scan clones the surrounding parts, which usually looks very good when zooming in.

Both Silverfast and Nikon Scan methods look great when zoomed out. I never tried Vuescan's infrared option. I just felt the positive colors it produced looks wrong/"dead".